It Is America Who Is Lucky, with DONALD J. TRUMP AS PRESIDENT!

WILL THE CRAZY LEFT RE-ELECT TRUMP?

by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

Donald Trump is a lucky man. First he got to run for president against an almost unbelievably bad candidate, Hillary Clinton, who couldn’t win despite having the FBI and CIA laboring on her behalf. Now it appears that he will run for re-election against the nominee of a party wholly in thrall to its most extreme and juvenile elements.

The New York Post headlines a piece by Mary Kay Linge: “Why young, left-wing radicals could help re-elect President Trump.” Linge notes a new book by Robby Soave of Reason.com, Panic Attack: Young Radicals In the Age of Trump:

Angry and anguished over Donald Trump’s 2016 victory, the Zillennials — leftist millennial and Generation Z activists — continue to fuel the anti-Trump resistance.

And they just might get him re-elected in 2020.

That’s because their ideology of intersectionality, and its full-frontal attack on moderation and compromise in American politics, “is a gift to Trump and those who continue to support him,” writes Robby Soave….

Today’s young radicals, like those of the 1960s, are openly anti-American. The difference is that the radicals of decades ago didn’t seriously think they could win a national election. Another difference is that today’s young radicals are crazy.

“[Intersectionalisty is] a tyranny of the most victimized,” Soave said. “The more categories of oppression you can claim, the more authority you have.”

It also spells trouble for every one of the Democrats’ 24 declared candidates, because the very qualities that could allow them to appeal to a broad swath of voters in the general election make a politician anathema to the intersectional left.

Relatively mainstream Democratic candidates like Joe Biden and Kirsten Gillibrand are falling over themselves trying to talk the intersectional language of 2019, but doing so only exposes them to ridicule. Meanwhile, the craziness marches on:

A willingness to tolerate those with differing views, once seen as a positive good in all corners of American society, is condemned by the Zillennial left. Many of the activists Soave interviewed believe that speech that offends them should be — or already is — illegal.

Juvenile leftists have largely managed to suppress free speech on college campuses, which, as has truly been said, are islands of repression in a sea of freedom. But they will not have such easy sailing when they try to impose their bizarre ideologies on the world at large.

[D]espite their widening influence, Zillennial activists are not a majority within the millennial and Gen Z cohorts.

“In fact, it’s striking how few they are but how large the effect they are having on our cultural and political dialogue,” Soave said. “They are very good at making it seem like they speak for everyone; very good at representing their demands as universal.

“They are a radical fringe, but they’re getting their way with their ability to control the conversation.”

Do they control the conversation? Only if you assume that the conversation takes place primarily on Twitter and in the pages of the New York Times. But these are vanishingly small slices of the real conversations that go on in the context of a presidential election.

And if Zillennials can’t get the candidate they want? They may not turn out to vote at all. “Biden and other moderate Dems’ … lack of progressive bona fides make them just another sad symptom of everything that’s wrong with the world,” Soave said. “Most Democratic candidates are seen as “not so much better than Trump that it’s worth the effort.”

In other words, Zillennials would rather risk a second Trump term than compromise the intersectional principles they hold so dear.

Of course, as already pointed out, there aren’t actually that many Zillenials. So will their staying home throw the election to President Trump? No, but what more likely will happen is that all of the Democratic candidates will be pushed into such silly positions by the ignorant left that whoever wins the nomination will be repudiated by the voters.

As I have said before, I think the jury verdict against Oberlin College shows what normal people think of “intersectionality” when they encounter it. My guess is that fewer than 10% of Americans have any idea what “intersectionality” refers to. But when they find out that it means that you can’t arrest a shoplifter because he is black, and it is not just acceptable but commendable for the shoplifter and his confederates to assault the guy who caught them for the same reason, they will be unhappy. And most will vote against anyone who is associated with such unjust and unAmerican principles.

Dem’s Fascist Obama Playing Dictator in Exile in France!?!

Obama playing dictator-in-exile from a kingly south of France palace?

by Monica Showalter  at  American Thinker:

President Obama is living the life of a former king, vacationing these days at a palatial estate in the south of France. At what point has he made enough? Silly us for asking.

Daily Mail has a report with a lot of photographs:

Former US president Barack Obama and his family arrived in Avignon in the south of France for a week’s holiday just days after they were pictured celebrating daughter Sasha’s graduation from high school.

The Obamas are reportedly staying at a luxurious 18th century farmhouse on Bathelasse island, near the Provencal city.

Barack, 57, his wife Michelle, 55, and their two daughters Sasha, 18, and Malia, 20, will relax at the palatial Le Mas des Poiriers, rented at 55,000 euros for the week, according to a report by Le Parisien.

The two former first daughters were seen out and about Saturday after jetting into the Provencal city on Friday.

Security detail from the Gard regional police as well as the US Secret Service will surround the residence as the former first family visit the area.

The property sits on 65 acres – providing seclusion and privacy for the Obamas  during their stay.

Why the taxpayers should pay for this via the security guard details, as if the man can’t afford any of his own after all the payoffs he’s now collecting from speeches and book deals is rather a side issue.

The problem is that this comes as he’s engaging in quite a few shenanigans on his own around Europe.

DCWhispers, a pretty reliable blog, reprinted an item stringing together all the Obama spottings around Europe with its leaders, all of whom are of the #NeverTrump ilk, calling it the activity of a “dictator in exile.” Obama’s met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. He’s also met with French President Emmanuel Macron. Funny, he’s now staying in Macron’s country now… And all of this comes as Obama has become increasingly implicated in the activities to overthrow President Trump from Deep State, a trail that’s now being investigated by the Justice Department. And it comes as revelations roll out about Obama’s former Secretary of State, John Kerry, as well as other prominent Democrats, such as Sen. Dianne Feinstein, meet with America’s enemies such as Iran on the sly, advising them to hold on until they can retake power.

The DCWhispers writer raises even more questions:

Why is a former president, any former president, conducting policy discussions that might have foreign policy implications with the leaders of foreign governments without first clearing his contacts with the currently seated administration?

That question is of even greater import in light of the diametrically opposed world views held by the current president and the former president.

Is Obama using his relationships with foreign leaders to continue pushing for the expansion of globalism, the shadow government’s foreign policy agenda?

If it’s all true, this is indeed how many ex-dictators in exile act. And actually, it’s never before been seen by former American presidents. It’s clearly a kind of decadence borne of a lifestyle of an idle rich person — using that idle time to plot a comeback. The south-of-France thang is a nice touch.

At a minimum, it’s time to pull the plug on the taxpayer funding for the presidential lifestyles-of-the-rich-and-famous abroad. It’s gone too far and now it’s leading to trouble. Why should the Secret Service tag this guy at huge taxpayer expense wherever he goes? And why should he be allowed to use these resources to run a shadow government?

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/06/obama_playing_dictatorinexile_from_a_south_of_france_palace_fit_for_a_king.html

Obama Lies Were the Foundation of the Schumer and Pelosi Lies about President Trump, the Person AND the Administration

The External Roots of Spygate

by Leo Goldstein at American Thinker:

.

Over the past three years, the MSM has done a thorough job brainwashing its captive audience into believing that Putin preferred, supported, or even colluded with Trump in the 2016 elections. Not only was this untrue, but even the idea of such a preference, much less collusion, was ridiculous in the U.S. in the spring of 2016. Russia was our ally in the fight against terror, and CIA Director John Brennan visited FSB head Gennadiy Bortnikov in Moscow in March 2016.

Not Trump, but the Democratic party and Hillary Clinton personally were the perfect fit for Putin. Hillary Clinton started her tenure as Secretary of State by implementing a “reset” with Russia in 2009. During 2012, Russia joined the World Trade Organization, and the West bought from it hot air (carbon credits). Later that year, Obama was caught on mic promising Medvedev that he would become even more accommodating towards Russia after the election. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama sold Uranium One to Russia, organized the transfer of dual-use technology in Skolkovo, and allied themselves with Russian-funded groups against fracking and pipelines in the U.S.  Allegations that Putin had a personal grudge against Hillary, and kept it for five years, are just laughable.

Trump conducted a Miss Universe pageant in Russia in 2013, and that was all. As a presidential candidate, he promised a U.S. military buildup, and he said the U.S. should shoot down Russian interceptors that were reportedly harassing U.S. military planes in international airspace, after appropriate diplomatic steps.

The ideation of a Putin-Trump association and of Russian interference on Trump’s behalf came from Western Europe. People of Germany, Britain, and other EU states were dissatisfied with policies robbing them of their sovereignty.  European politicians wanted to crush dissent, and Russia and Putin became a convenient boogeyman. The government of Angela Merkel blamed Russia for public protests. This is how Obama advisor Ben Rhodes illustrated this attitude in his book The World as It Is:

In Germany, Merkel’s spokesperson told me about how fake news impacted their politics… A rape, for instance, caused a huge outcry in a community. For days, there were protests, political fallout. … “And we trace the story, and it started with a social media user with a German-sounding name, but something is not exactly right. The name is a little off. And the server, it is not German…Russians…”

Later, James Clapper expressed a similar sentiment, saying that the Russians are “almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever.” Peter Strzok and Lisa Page exchanged comparable texts immediately before officially launching Crossfire Hurricane.

Rhodes’ quote continues:

I thought about all the made-up stories about Hillary — her ill health, her corruption, her crimes.

Sorry for making you laugh amid such a serious matter.

Apparently, the hysteria about alleged Russian internet operations was based on a small study of coordinated political trolling in Latvia. The study didn’t include Germany, Britain, or any other large European country, and its conclusions are inapplicable to them. But the study is clear on one point:

…the influence of pro-Russian trolling on leading US media outlets demonstrated the opposite outcome to that expected.

While Germans protested Merkel’s immigration policies, the British demanded freedom from the European Union, and were preparing to vote on Brexit. The old guard, which has almost stolen the country from its citizens, also blamed Russia and Putin.

In April 2016, Obama went to Britain to stomp against Brexit, an interference in British domestic affairs, obviously inviting reciprocation — interference from the British government in the U.S. elections on behalf of the Democratic party. Here, the connection between Trump and the U.S. elections was even stronger. Rhodes laments:

 …the Brexit campaign was tapping into the same sense of nationalism and nostalgia that the Trump campaign was promoting back home: the days of Churchill, the absence of immigrants and intrusive international institutions.

The Obama administration’s desire to subject this country to intrusive international institutions is an important admission. Trump is a defender of U.S. sovereignty, and such institutions are its enemies.

The Eurocrats confused the invented threat of “Russian influence campaigns” with the real prospect that Trump would not be their ally against their own people — unlike Obama or Hillary. In their imagination, the Trump-Putin nexus was natural. Ben Rhodes unintentionally confirms this point by quoting the chief of staff to then Prime Minister David Cameron:

“You’re not worried that he [Trump] can win? Putin would like nothing more.  Some of our people,” he said, referring to conservatives who support Brexit, “say that he’s tapped into something with this immigration issue.”

The Obama administration’s propensity to accommodate EU and UN agendas primed it to believe lies about Trump. It looks as if the Obama administration imported both the obsession with “Russian influence campaigns” and the wacky idea of a Trump-Putin connection. European governments created projects to combat “Russian influence campaigns” at home and abroad, joined by the Obama administration in April 2016.

On May 13, exactly one week after CrowdStrike privately attributed the DNC hacking to an imaginary GRU hacking group APT28 (“Fancy Bear”), German secret police (BfV) publicly blamed the same imaginary group for the Bundestag hacking that happened a year earlier. The DNC emails, published by WikiLeaks on July 22, were probably leaked by a disgruntled Bernie supporter, unrelated to hacking.

In mid-April 2016, Bruce & Nellie Ohr were in contact with the German Embassy, discussing with its first secretary what the Germans called “Impact of Russian influence operations in Europe (‘PsyOps/InfoWar’)” and the embassy’s offer to provide “Russia analysts.” They also invited the secretary to their house. What came out of it is unknown because they deleted the emails immediately.

By the end of May, the conspiracy theory of Trump-Putin collusion has been already developed. Obama’s AG Loretta Lynch has testified:

…the constellation of things that have come to be known as the Russia investigation, things were brought to my attention in 2016, I believe it was the spring… the late spring …by the Director [Comey] and Deputy Director [McCabe]… And over the course of the summer most of briefings on that issue were shifted to the National Security Council level.

The National Security Council Principals are “some of the highest-ranking officials in the government, including the secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense, and Homeland Security, the attorney general, the head of the CIA, the White House chief of staff, UN ambassador, and more.” All of them were Obama appointees. All of them had been told to toe the party line — that Trump was not an ordinary candidate, but a suspected Putin agent. The only problem with this theory was total lack of evidence.

We live in the 21^st century. Contacts and connections between people in different countries are routine.  Words and contacts between the Trump associates and Russia, whether real or invented, could not, even when misinterpreted in the worst possible way, rise to the level of “collusion.” Despite that, by the end of May 2016 the case against Trump was already formed and even escalated to the level of the National Security Council. It had no supporting evidence, but plenty of contradictory facts. And then the DNC contractor Fusion GPS hired Steele. Together, they manufactured the “evidence” — the infamous Steele dossier. CrowdStrike was already hired. (Note the timing: the first CrowdStrike report went out on June 14, and the first Steele report was dated by June 20.) Both DNC contractors would be churning out their reports through December 2016. The rest is history.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/06/the_external_roots_of_spygate.html